Re: A Guide to the "Essential" survey

David MacDonald wrote:

> ### Adapting Text [question 3]

> I agree there is a problem, but removing essential is a normative change, that increases the requirement on authors.

I’d note for this one that we’ve been through the top 50 websites to test it, and found relatively few issues. E.g. certain boxes in google search results with a fixed height would start overlaping. Most content (even navigation menus) were fine, which surprised me a bit.

For those that remember trying to get text-sizing working up to 200%, imagine doing it for 115%, it is actually easier than I thought it would be. Remember that I was arguing for a smaller overall level of expansion? I stopped making that argument after the testing.

Therefore I didn’t have a problem with dropping essential here, even before the logical issues were pointed out.

> ### Content on Hover or Focus [question 6]

> I agree there is a problem, but swapping essential for "pure decoration" is a normative change, there is a difference. I think we should pause on fixing this one, and bring it back to the LVTF, and fix it separately.

How about the phrase we use in sizing, “content or functionality”, so:

“Either the additional content does not obscure any content or functionality within the triggering user interface component,”

That’s somewhere between the dictionary meaning of essential, and ‘unless’ pure decoration.



Received on Thursday, 5 October 2017 08:38:52 UTC